You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access
to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to start new topics, reply to conversations, privately message other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join RX8Club.com today!
While he obviously doesn't know the the Rotary actually has a history, and is not v 1.0 as he puts, he makes some good points. Getting the newest technology before the bugs are worked out has its concerns. However this person obviously knows nothing about Mazda and this amazing engine! And to say the the car magazine writers don't know much about cars is just foolish to say the least.
He does make a point though, Many first year cars do have problems. When I do get an RX8, (to compliment my FD...i love saying that) It'll most likely be a second year RX8 aka 2005. Not because I have a lack of faith in the new MAZDA, but most 1st year cars do have their little problems. Like the I-Drive in the 745iL and the MINI Cooper S.
But also, I hope MAZDA uses a really good trans in this one, the Autos they seem to use lately =suck.
I didn't know the new Mini had I-Drive - must be just the Cooper S model .
Actually I have been slightly bitten by a 1st year car. My IS300 was the first one ever sold on the east coast (perhaps 2nd in the USA) - it had no real bugs but there were tremendous improvements in quality of materials and more standard equipment for the 2nd year (plus you could buy near invoice instead of MSRP). I would prefer to never buy another 'early-adopter' car again, but the end of my lease forces me to get the RX-8 in August.
Current cars: '12 BMW X5 xDrive35i Sport Activity, '10 BMW 535i, '99 Mazda Miata
Previous cars: '08 BMW X5 3.0si, '07 Lexus IS350, '06 Lexus GX470, '04 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6MT, '04 Mazda RX-8, '02 Acura MDX, '01 Lexus IS300, '99 Lexus RX300
Actually I have been slightly bitten by a 1st year car. My IS300 was the first one ever sold on the east coast (perhaps 2nd in the USA) - it had no real bugs but there were tremendous improvements in quality of materials and more standard equipment for the 2nd year (plus you could buy near invoice instead of MSRP).
This is becoming a trend for me. I was one of the first in the St Louis area to buy an IS300. I love it! Never had any trouble with it.
Will be 3 years in June, so it's time to exchange it for an RX-8.
The uncompromised Buffoon who, I am surprised, can write at all, much less even drive a car, which I'm sure he has not, is living in a world of 4 speed non synchronized manual trannys, with fully non independent live axle suspensions, open horseless carriage from around the turn of the century.
If this idiot has his way, we would not have car radios, air conditioning, roll up windows, disc brakes, independent suspensions. . . maybe even we should be in horseless carriages . . . or maybe that would be too advanced for him.
The fact of the matter is that the ROTARY ENGINE is an advance in technology that scares the Toronto Idiot. The ROTARY is so good that it has been banned from competing in many races as having an unfair advantage.
I say we hang him high now!!!
Gimmie my MazdaSpeed RX-8 NOW!!
I must take issue with Alex Law's article on the Mazda RX-8, dated February 20, 2003 (link at the bottom). In it he makes numerous errors, some of which I will comment on.
1. "The key demand of new technology for the consumer can be generically stated as ``What problem does it solve?'' (By all accounts, the Mazda Rotary has no advantages over many conventional engines.)"
Mr. Law is incorrect in stating that "the Mazda Rotary has no advantage over many conventional engines". I am curious if he has ever driven a rotary engined car. The incredible smoothness of a rotary engine cannot be overstated. It's difficult to imagine how significant this is over the typical noise, vibration and harshness that piston engines suffer from until one drives an electric vehicle or a car with a rotary engine.
Also, how many 1.3 liter engines is Mr. Law aware of that make 250 HP? This small size translates into a lightweight engine, and any driver interested in performance knows that light weight is the only thing that enhances every area of a car's performance. In addition, the rotary can be mounted lower than a conventional piston engine, resulting in a lower center of gravity for the vehicle. It can also be mounted further back in the engine bay, lowering the rotational moment of inertia, which can help enhance the agility of the car. The RX-8 is actually a front-mid engine layout, instead of a traditional front-engine layout.
There are very significant advantages that the rotary engine has over traditional piston engines.
2. "The first potential problem for the consumer from new technology is that the company may not get V 1.0 right..."
This is not V1.0 for the rotary engine. It has proven to be extraordinarily reliable in all of it's naturally aspirated variants, including each model's first year. It is true that there is some uncertainty whether that incredible record will translate to the RENESIS, but it shouldn't be overlooked as well. It is also true that the turbocharged rotary engines of the past have had reliability issues, but this is not a turbocharged engine.
3. "the resale risk of new technology becomes an issue."
Ask the owners of 3rd generation RX-7s from 1993 how they like the resale value of their first year rotary engined cars. I suspect that they will be counting the money as they walk to the bank, and won't deign to respond.
I find these misrepresentations and errors in Mr. Law's article very disturbing. While he does bring up some valid points, the fact that he attacks a truly innovative product with falsehoods is reprehensible.
I hope the Star does not condone ignoring the facts in its articles.
geez, why is everyone taking so much offense to the article? it's like you guys all had a integral part in the design of the renesis or something. don't take it so personally.
before everyone starts in on me, i should say that i am a big rx-8 fan and don't like the fact that he uses the rx-8 as an example of technology to avoid. but he makes some valid points in general about the need for technology to innovatively solve problems. that's about all i get from his article.
funny that he kinda contradicts himself when he says "if it doesn't provide you with a better automotive experience by delivering better performance or increased fuel economy or quieter operation or a longer operating life ... you should stay well away from it for a long, long time." isn't that what the renesis is supposed to provide? better performance (see Rich's letter), fuel economy (pretty good compared to other 200+ hp piston engines), quieter operation and longer life (fewer moving engine parts)...
anyway, everybody is entitled to his/her opinions... even if they are dumb. :whatever:
The reason I took offense was that there were serious misconseptions published in an established news source that could negatively impact the future of a technology that I believe is fantastic.
The rotary has an uphill battle already, since it has to deal with the FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) factor with the vast majority of the motoring public. With that already against it, we as rotatry and even just general automobile enthusiasts have an obligation to set the record straight.
If the technology fails because the implementation is bad, has a fundamental problem, or simply has no place in the market, that's the best of capitalism at work. If a technology fails due to misconceptions, lies, or deceipt, those in the know must share in the blame.
Also, I hate to let falsehoods go without challenge, purely on ethical principle.
Now, let me tell you how I came to find this article and maybe you'll see why it's such a big deal...
I was visiting my parents this past weekend and since my dad is looking at buying a new Mazda 6 we started talking about cars. I then mentioned I was interesed in the RX-8. I'm a rotary fanatic so his response kinda shocked me. He went on to tell me that he had just read an article that said you should stay away from the RX-8 cause it'll be unreliable, expensive to repair, have poor resale...etc, etc.
The majority of the population don't hang out on rotary forums ...they get there information from articles like the one published in the Toronto Star. So when some jack-*** like Mr. Law comes along and publishes a bunch of FUD, I get a little annoyed.
As Rich stated, the rotary already has it's work cut out for it...it doesn't need this kind of misinformation being spread around.
Ok you love the rotary. And so do I. And so I tend to forget that only few people know what a rotary is. They just donīt know though some of them talk about it. So the bullshit that comes out doesn't take me wonder.
However, while we love the concept of the rotary we have to fight the ignorance. Everyone of us can do it. A first step is to think about why do we love it. When I was thinking about it I came to a very simple answer: I like the engine that much because it loves to rev. It is a true sports car's engine addicted to high revings more than any other x banger. (Forget about F1 engines in this connection - if you want a rotary that does 17k for one season you can easily have it). So here is the very reason for having a rotary in a sports car: Its a sports engine.
Originally posted by veloceracing He does make a point though, Many first year cars do have problems. When I do get an RX8, (to compliment my FD...i love saying that) It'll most likely be a second year RX8 aka 2005. Not because I have a lack of faith in the new MAZDA, but most 1st year cars do have their little problems.
Couldn't agree more. I only got 5 of the 12 recalls done on my '00 Focus Kona Edition before my ex totalled it.